R v Michael Dean Khan

[2010] NSWDC 341

CITATION:	R v Michael Dean KHAN; Dushand RANA; Saurav MAHAY [2010] NSWDC 341
JUDGMENT DATE:	12 November 2010
JURISDICTION:	District Court of New South Wales
JUDGMENT OF:	Cogswell SC DCJ
DECISION:	For Mr Rana and Mr Mahay - non-parole periods of 3 years and balances of term of 2 years. For Mr Khan - non-parole period of 2 years 8 months and balance of term of 1 year 10 months
CATCHWORDS:	CRIME - sentence - conviction after jury trial - specially aggravated detain for advantage - victim assaulted and suffered not insignificant actual bodily harm during the detention - detention whilst in company for over half a day - relative culpability of offenders - joint criminal enterprise - all 3 co-offenders present for whole period of detention - knife produced by one offender - ransom of $7000 demanded - lower end of seriousness for these types of crimes - 2 offenders on criminal justice visa - all offenders unlikely to re-offend - special circumstances warranting adjusting the ratio between non-parole and parole period in each case
LEGISLATION CITED:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 s 21
CASES CITED:	R v Groundir [2001] NSWCCA 198 R v Newell [2004] NSWCCA 183
PARTIES:	Michael Dean Khan Dushand Rana Saurav Mahay
FILE NUMBER(S):	2008/211508; 2008/254927; 2008/82064
COUNSEL:	Mr S De Silva for the Director of Public Prosecutions Ms K Stares for Mr Khan Ms ST Hall for Mr Rana
SOLICITORS:	Mr WJ Sandilands for Mr Mahay

JUDGMENT

1. Mr Khan, Mr Rana and Mr Mahay, as your lawyers would have told you, I am going to sentence you now and that involves me talking for about three-quarters of an hour or more about the case and then, at the end of that, I impose the sentences.

2. This is a case where I have to sentence three men, two of them in their twenties, for their involvement in a very serious crime. The crime is called specially aggravated detain for ransom. The special aggravations were that during the detention, the victim was assaulted and as a result of that, incurred actual bodily harm. The detention also was perpetrated by the offenders whilst in each other’s company.

3. Parliament has fixed a maximum sentence of twenty-five years imprisonment to this crime, which demonstrates how serious it is regarded.

4. First, I have to say briefly what happened in this case to result in the charges and I will set out as my findings this brief account of the events that led to the charges.

5. I will refer to the victim as ‘the victim’ as the law protects his identity. The offenders Rana and Mahay picked him up at his home in Doonside and went to buy some alcohol, then they took him to the offender Khan’s house. There was, at that stage, no question of any coercion. When they reached Mr Khan’s house, the four men were drinking and smoking there, except that Mr Khan himself did not consume any alcohol.

6. Later in…